Wednesday, July 18, 2012

Reverse.

Can
Liberal Christianity Be Saved? That’s the question posed
by Ross Douthat, the always interesting
conservative NY Times columnist and a committed Roman Catholic. Of course, the same can be asked about Liberal
Judaism or Islam. Better yet, would be to question if liberal
religion is viable in the first place. Taking
the long view, a strong argument can be made that it is not. The orthodox across all religions share one
thing in common. For them religion is
essential to their being, as natural and necessary as breathing air. They make no real distinction between the holy and the profane. Consequently, life is
a cohesive and integrated whole where religious practice is not an option but a
necessity. In contrast, the non-orthodox
(while certainly not monolithic) generally approach religion as something to be
done, often at a specific time and
place. I like to describe it as by appointment. Appointments are meant to be kept but, the
best intentions notwithstanding, they are often to be missed, something that can
become a habit, feeding on itself.

With that in mind, it’s not surprising that
orthodox leaders like the Pope whom Douthat references, stand fast against any liberalization. They pushback against Vatican II-like reforms, seeing them as dilutive and
ultimately destructive. It’s hard to
argue with that conclusion. And that’s
precisely what concerns Douthat even though he recognizes that progressive
religion has played a key role in civil rights and other efforts aimed at
bettering our society, what Jews call tikun
olam.

At the same time, just as taken to its logical
conclusion, liberalization may lead to destruction, we should not overlook the
chicken and egg question. Liberal
religion may be positioned as modernizing belief and practice, but is it rather
reactive — aimed at saving something that would otherwise be lost? There is considerable data suggesting that
people in the West (including
the United States) are moving from religion at an accelerating pace. They may be
exiting from liberal churches and synagogues but also from the orthodox. Only the influx of Hispanics can mask the
full dimension of Catholic Church losses better seen in the forced closing of many parishes and schools. Only 40%
of those brought up as Orthodox Jews remain so as adults.

So the question posed by Ross Douthat may be
interesting but it is ultimately the wrong one.
Considering current trends — the doubling of the no-religion-at-all group in
the last decade — shouldn’t we be asking if religion can be saved? I’d suggest both orthodox and
liberal religious leaders, admit it or not, have that question top of mind and
have developed different strategies in response to the perceived danger.

The orthodox are turning inward, hitting the
reverse button if you will. Their
religion is becoming narrower, more doctrinaire and often more militant (in
some cases violent). They are closing
all windows and drawing all shades to avoid even a trickle of air or light that
might disrupt their way. It is why Rome
is reining in their nuns, which Douthat sees as something being done for their own
protection. I don’t buy it. By the same token, liberals are desperately
trying to find innovative ways that will engage their constituents while simultaneously hitting their own reverse button. For them this means dipping into the
tradition and in some instances reinstating customs if not ideas that had been
previously abandoned. All the while,
they know that without embracing modernity they can’t sustain the flock or
themselves. A conundrum to which there
is no easy response.

These are very different strategies and both may ultimately
constitute short-term fixes. The Higgs
bosom is not the God particle, but a bit of matter that will give
scientists greater insight into our origins; insights that obviate any Let there be. Religion has been around a long time and it is
sure survive far into the future.
It remains more resilient in some places than others, in some pockets
even in places hostile to its teaching.
It survived Stalin. But, as life
itself, religion — the adherence to what some of us believe — is likely to be
finite not eternal. Measured against the
rigors of scientific testing, it falls short.
The radical idea of religion as finite, is something its followers don’t
dare consider because that, not liberalism or orthodoxy, is a real game
changer.

No comments:

Post a Comment

Follow by Email

About Me

A branding consultant with decades of experience working with large global clients and brands, he now serves primarily young startup companies. Beginning his professional life as a rabbi of a large urban congregation, he has watched the numbers of the religiously unaffiliated grow in the years since leaving the pulpit. His book, Transcenders: Living beyond religion and the religion wars (available on Amazon) considers this phenomenon. Beyond his consulting practice Prinz spends much of his time writing, including this Blog. He posts to "Beyond All That" only when there is something to say that might add value to the conversation.